Dual laser closure scan and method of using the same

ABSTRACT

A system of measuring a top surface of a closure to determine if the closure is properly affixed to a container. Multiple paths of measurements may be collected and analyzed. In various analysis paradigms, measurements on a given path are separated into different sets, such as a leading set that generally includes the first third of measurements, a trailing set that includes the trailing set of measurements, and a middle set that includes the middle third of measurements. Several methods of analysis may be based on a presumption that a properly affixed closure is symmetrical or near symmetrical.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED PATENT APPLICATION

This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No.16/225,812, filed Dec. 19, 2018, which is incorporated herein byreference in its entirety.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present disclosure relates generally to the field of closures. Thepresent disclosure relates specifically to monitoring closures onbottles to confirm they are affixed tightly and correctly to containers.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Described herein are systems and methods to determine whether closuresare properly affixed to containers. In one or more embodiments thesystem uses multiple lasers to measure distances. The containers aremoved, via a conveyer, under a laser platform and measurements ofdistances to the top of the closure are collected and analyzed. Based onanalysis of the measurements, the system determines whether the closureis properly affixed to the container.

In one embodiment, the system comprises a conveyer for containers, suchas bottles, and multiple distance measuring devices, such as lasers thatinclude laser detectors. The conveyer moves the containers in a firstdirection past the lasers. The top surface of the closure is measured bythe lasers along multiple paths, one path per detection device. In thesituation in which the lasers are stationary, the detection paths on theclosure are straight lines, but it is contemplated herein that thelasers may be adjustable.

Each path can be divided into multiple sets of measurements that aredistinct from each other. For example, a path may include a leading setof measurements, which includes measurements that are generally centeredaround the front-third of the corresponding path, a middle set ofmeasurements, which includes measurements that are generally centered onthe corresponding path, and a trailing set of measurements, whichincludes measurements that are generally centered around the rear-thirdof the corresponding path.

The sets of measurements are analyzed to determine whether the closureis properly affixed to its container. One method of analysis averagesone or more sets, and if each averaged set is below a threshold theclosure is properly affixed. Another method of analysis averages two ormore sets and subtracts the highest average from the lowest average. Ifthe difference is less than a threshold, then the closure is properlyaffixed. Another method of analysis calculates a difference between themiddle set and the average of one or both of the leading and trailingsets. If the difference or differences are less than a threshold, thenthe closure is properly affixed. Another method of analysis confirmsthat the leading and trailing sets have opposite slopes of near equalmagnitudes. For example, if the leading set has an upward slopemeasurement of 8 (eight), then the trailing set should have a downwardslope measurement at or near −8 (negative eight), assuming the closureto be properly affixed.

Another method of analysis involves summing differences betweensubsequent measurements, starting at the outer part of the closuremoving inward, for one or more of the sets. The sums for multiple setsare compared to each other. Because a properly affixed closure istypically, although not necessarily, symmetrical, the sum for each setshould be equal or nearly equal.

Various other methods of analysis consider pairs of measurements. Forexample, given an exemplary path that includes 40 measurements, onemethod pairs up the measurements (e.g., measurements 1 and 40, 2 and 39,3 and 38, etc.). The differences between some (e.g., 5 pairs, 10 pairs)or all the pairs is calculated, and the differences are summed together.If the sum is below a threshold the closure is properly affixed. One ormore of these methods involves summing differences from different pathsand comparing that sum to the threshold.

In one or more embodiments the processor and other devices in the systemgenerate signals that are representative of the measurements andcalculations being performed. It is contemplated herein that the signalsmay be transmitted between devices (e.g., from the first laser to theprocessor) or they may be internal to a device (e.g., from the processorvia one calculation to the processor for a second calculation).

Additional features and advantages will be set forth in the detaileddescription which follows, and, in part, will be readily apparent tothose skilled in the art from the description or recognized bypracticing the embodiments as described in the written description andclaims hereof, as well as the appended drawings. It is to be understoodthat both the foregoing general description and the following detaileddescription are exemplar

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

This application may be more fully understood from the followingdetailed description, taken in conjunction with the accompanyingfigures, wherein like reference numerals refer to like elements inwhich:

FIG. 1 depicts a system for determining whether closures are properlyaffixed to containers, according to an exemplary embodiment;

FIG. 2 depicts a top surface of a closure being analyzed by the systemof FIG. 1 , according to an exemplary embodiment;

FIG. 3 depicts a top surface of a closure being analyzed by the systemof FIG. 1 , according to an exemplary embodiment;

FIG. 4 depicts a top surface of a closure being analyzed by the systemof FIG. 1 , according to an exemplary embodiment;

FIG. 5 depicts a top surface of a closure being analyzed by the systemof FIG. 1 , according to an exemplary embodiment;

FIG. 6 depicts a top surface of a closure being analyzed by the systemof FIG. 1 , according to an exemplary embodiment;

FIG. 7 depicts two series of measurements, by two lasers, of a closurethat has been properly affixed to a container, according to anembodiment;

FIG. 8 depicts two series of measurements, by two lasers, of a closurethat has not been properly affixed to a container, according to anembodiment;

FIG. 9 depicts two series of measurements, by two lasers, of a closurethat has not been properly affixed to a container, according to anembodiment;

FIG. 10 depicts a system for determining whether closures are properlyaffixed to containers, according to another embodiment; and

FIG. 11 depicts a series of steps to utilize one or more systemsdescribed in this disclosure, according to an exemplary system of use.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Many automated systems apply closures to containers via automated means.However, closures are not always properly affixed to the containers. Toavoid spills and problems, it is useful to quickly identify whichclosures are not properly affixed to their respective containers.

In one embodiment, a system includes a conveyer belt, a laser platformand a discarding mechanism. When the system determines that a closure isnot properly affixed the discarding mechanism redirects the offendingclosure and container to be separately addressed. The laser platformincludes two or more lasers that measure distances to different paths onthe top surface of the closures. The distances measured are analyzed todetermine the status of closure (e.g., whether the closure is properlyaffixed to the container). Several different analysis methodologies canbe used, many of which utilize two separate measurements of distances toa top surface of the closure.

Illustrated in FIG. 1 is an exemplary system 100 for determining whetherclosures have been properly applied to containers, according to anexemplary embodiment. System 100 includes conveyer 102 that movescontainers B in direction 136 past laser platform 110. Laser platform110 includes first detection device 106 and second detection device 108,shown as first laser 106 and second laser 108. It is contemplated hereinthat first and second detection devices 106, 108 may be any type ofdevice that would detect distances to a closure C, such as alaser-emitting device with a laser receiver (e.g., first and secondlasers 106, 108).

First and second lasers 106, 108 periodically emit lasers in a generallydownward direction towards conveyer 102, and when present top surface TSof closure C. The emitted laser is reflected back from the surface itstrikes and first and second lasers 106, 108 include detectors thatreceive the reflected light and then calculate the distance to thesurface that reflected the light. By these measurements, system 100 candetermine whether closure C is properly affixed to containers B.

System 100 may be configured to work with all types of closures andcontainers. For exemplary purposes only and without limitation, system100 may be configured to work with metal closures on glass containerswhere the contents are in a vacuum, and subsequently adjusted to workwith plastic closures on plastic containers.

As containers B pass under laser platform 110, first and second lasers106, 108 measure the distance to closure C. First laser 106 measures thedistance to closure C along first path 150, and second laser 108measures the distance to closure C along second path 180. System 100then analyzes the measured distances and determines whether closure C isproperly affixed to container B. If system 100 determines closure C isproperly affixed to container B, then redirector component 114 remainsin position 140, thus allowing container B to continue traveling alongconveyer 102. If system 100 determines closure C is not properly affixedto container B, then redirector component 114 pivots to position 142,redirecting container B to conveyer 112 to a collection of rejectedcontainers B. Rejected containers B may be discarded, manually examined,and/or closure C may be removed and reattached.

Turning now to FIG. 2 , illustrated therein is a top surface TS ofclosure C that is passing under first and second lasers 106, 108.Container B, and thus also closure C, are moving in direction 136 alongconveyer 102. As closure C passes under first and second lasers 106,108, they measure distances along first and second paths 150, 180,respectively.

In one exemplary embodiment, first and second paths 150, 180 areequidistant from center line 120, and first and second lasers 106, 108are first and second peripheral distances 126, 128 from the lateral edgeof closure C that is furthest from center point 118 as viewed from theperspective of direction 136. In the exemplary embodiment in FIG. 2 ,central displacement distances 124 are approximately one-half of lateraldisplacement distances 126, 128, and thus first and second paths 150,180 are displaced from center line 120 by approximately one-third of theradius of top surface TS of closure C.

In another embodiment the location of first and second lasers 106, 108are adjusted to larger or smaller distances 124 from center line 120. Inanother embodiment, the location of first and second lasers 106, 108 mayremain static but their aim may be adjusted such that first and secondpaths 150, 180 are larger or smaller distances 124 from center line 120.In yet another embodiment, first and second paths 150, 180 areindependently adjusted so that each has a different distance from centerline 120.

Turning to FIG. 3 , as top surface TS of closure C passes under laserplatform 110, first and second lasers 106, 108 measure distances atvarious measurement locations 130 along first and second paths 150, 180.In FIG. 3 , first and second lasers 106, 108 measure forty location 130along each of first and second paths 150, 180. It is contemplated hereinthat any number of measurements per detection device 106, 108 may beused, such as a certain number of measurements per closure (e.g., 30,40, 50, 100) or a certain number of measurements per distance (e.g., onemeasurement every millimeter, one measurement every 0.25 millimeter,etc.).

As will be discussed later in greater detail, for various methods ofanalysis measurements 130 on first path 150 are separated into differentsets of measurements 130. Generating these subsets of measurements 130enables analysis of whether closure C is properly affixed to containerB.

In one exemplary situation depicted in FIG. 3 , first leading set 152 ofmeasurements 130 is in direction 136 from center point 118 along firstpath 150. First trailing set 154 of measurements 130 is in the rearwardhalf of top surface TS along first path 150. In one or more embodimentsfirst leading set 152 and first trailing set 154 are symmetrical alongfirst path 150 with respect to the center of first path 150, althoughother non-symmetrical groupings of first leading set 152 and firsttrailing set 154 are contemplated.

Second leading set 182 of measurements 130 is in direction 136 fromcenter point 118 along second path 180. Second trailing set 184 ofmeasurements 130 are opposite first leading set 182 along second path180. In one or more embodiments, second leading set 182 and secondtrailing set 184 are symmetrical along second path 180 with respect toits center, although other non-symmetrical groupings of second leadingset 182 and second trailing set 184 are contemplated.

One system of analyzing whether closure C is properly affixed is basedon whether averages of one or more of first leading set 152, firsttrailing set 154, second leading set 182 and second trailing set 184 arebelow a threshold. For example, averages are calculated for each offirst leading set 152, first trailing set 154, second leading set 182and second trailing set 184. The averages are then compared to athreshold. If all of the averages are below a threshold, then closure Cis determined to be properly affixed. If at least one of the averages isabove a threshold, then closure C is determined to be improperlyaffixed, and should be discarded (e.g., by redirecting component 114 tosecond position 142 so that container B with improperly affixed closureC is redirected to secondary conveyer 112).

In another method, closure C is determined to be properly affixed if:Highest Average−Lowest Average<Threshold. For example, the highest andlowest of at least two averages are selected. The lowest average issubtracted from the highest average to calculate a difference. Becausethe first leading set 152, first trailing set 154, second leading set182 and second trailing set 184 are symmetrically arranged on closure Cwith respect to center point 118, the difference between themeasurements for each set should be very similar, if anything.Therefore, if the difference between the highest and lowest averages isless than a threshold, closure C is determined to be properly affixed,and if the difference between the highest and lowest averages is greaterthan a threshold, closure C is determined to not be properly affixed.

In another method, closure C is determined to be properly affixed ifMiddle Average−(Leading Average+Trailing Average)/2>Threshold, or MiddleAverage−(Leading Average+Trailing Average)/2<Threshold, depending on thenominal characteristics of the closure, for one or both of first andsecond paths 150, 180. For example, first middle set 156 and secondmiddle set 186 are also identified and an average for each iscalculated. For at least one of the paths 150 or 180, the average of themiddle set 156 or 186 is compared to the average of both averages of theleading set 152 and the trailing set 154, or the average of bothaverages of the leading set 182 and the trailing set 184, and adifference is calculated. The difference is then compared to athreshold. For certain types of closure C, where the difference isgreater than the threshold, then the closure C is determined to not beproperly affixed. For other types of closure C, where the difference isless than the threshold, then the closure C is determined to not beproperly affixed.

In yet another method, closure C is determined to be properly affixed ifMiddle Average−Leading Average<Threshold and Middle Average−TrailingAverage<Threshold, for one or both of first and second paths 150, 180.For example, first middle set 156 and second middle set 186 are alsoidentified and an average for each is calculated. For at least one ofpaths 150 or 180, the average of the middle set 156 or 186 is comparedto the average of the leading set 152 or 182, for the same path, and afirst difference is calculated. Then the average of the middle set 156or 186 is compared to the average of the trailing set 154 or 184 and asecond difference is calculated. The first and second differences arecompared to a threshold and if both differences are below a thresholdthen the closure C is determined to be properly affixed, whereas if oneof the differences is greater than the threshold, then the closure C isdetermined to not be properly affixed.

Turning to FIG. 4 , analysis of closure C may consider front measurement158 and back measurement 160 of first leading set 152. Analysis ofclosure C may also consider front measurement 162 and back measurement164 of first trailing set 154, front measurement 188 and backmeasurement 190 of second leading set 182, and/or front measurement 192and back measurement 194 of second trailing set 184.

For closure C to be properly affixed, leading sets 152, 182 should havea symmetrical slope moving compared to trailing sets 154, 184. Forexample, if first leading set 152 has an upward slope towards the centerof closure C, then first trailing set 154 should have a downward slopeof an equal or near equal magnitude, or closure C is determined to notbe properly affixed. If second leading set 182 has an upward slopemoving towards the center of closure C, then second trailing set 184should have a downward slope of an equal or near equal magnitude, orclosure C is determined to not be properly affixed. Slopes of the setsmay be calculated by subtracting measurement 130 from the front of theset minus measurement 130 from the back of the set. For example, turningto FIG. 4 , measurement 158 is the front measurement 130 of firstleading set 152 and measurement 160 is the back measurement 130 of firstleading set 152. Measurement 162 is the front measurement 130 of firsttrailing set 154 and measurement 164 is the back measurement 130 offirst trailing set 154. For second path 180, measurement 188 is thefront measurement 130 of second leading set 182 and measurement 190 isthe back measurement 130 of second leading set 182, and measurement 192is the front measurement 130 of second trailing set 184 and measurement194 is the back measurement 130 of second trailing set 184. The backmeasurement 130 is subtracted from the front measurement 130 tocalculate a slope for the respective set.

Turning to FIG. 5 , analysis of closure C may be focused on a presumedsymmetry of closure C when properly affixed. Analysis of closure Cconsiders first pair of measurements 166 on first path 150. First pair166 of measurements 130 on first path 150 includes front element 166Aand back element 166B. Second pair 168 of measurements 130 includesfront element 168A and back element 168B.

To analyze whether closure C is properly affixed, a first difference iscalculated for first pair 166 between measurement 166A and measurement166B, and second difference is calculated for second pair 168 betweenmeasurement 168A and measurement 168B. This calculation of differencescontinues for measurements 130 of first path 150 towards the center offirst path 150. Then the differences are summed together. If the sum ofdifferences on first path 150 is less than a threshold, closure C isdetermined to be properly affixed, and if the sum of differences onfirst path 180 is greater than a threshold, closure C is determined tonot be properly affixed. The same calculations are performed for secondpath 180.

It is contemplated that any number of pairs on first path 150 may beanalyzed to determine if closure C is properly affixed. For example,five sets of pairs may be selected from first path 150 (e.g., secondmeasurement 130 through sixth measurement from the perimeter of topsurface TS of closure C), or 19 pairs may be selected (e.g., all but theouter measurements 130), or any number of pairs (e.g., 5, 10, 15, 20)between multiple paths.

In this example both front and back element 166A, 166B are not themeasurement 130 closest to the periphery of top surface TS but areinstead the second-closest measurement 130 to the periphery of topsurface TS. The motivation for this selection of the second-closestmeasurement is that occasionally the closest measurement to theperiphery is not a reliable measurement 130 because the edge of closureC interferes with the accuracy of that measurement 130. In otherembodiments first pair 166 of measurements 130 used for the analysis arethe closest measurements 130 to periphery of top surface TS. Similarlywith respect to second path 180, first pair 196 of measurements 130includes front element 196A and back element 196B. Second pair 198 ofmeasurements 130 includes front element 198A and back element 198B.

Turning to FIG. 6 , the delta between successive measurements 130 indifferent sets 152, 154, 156 may be summed and compared as follows:

$\begin{matrix}{\sum\limits_{n = 2}^{w}\;\left( {x_{n} - x_{({n - 1})}} \right)} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 1}\end{matrix}$

In Equation 1, x_(n) represents a measurement 130 at a given location n,x_((n-1)) represents a measurement 130 at a successive neighboringlocation, n represents the sample number and w represents the number ofsamples in a set. For illustrative purposes only, an application of thisequation will be explained with reference to FIG. 6 .

In first leading set 152 on first path 150, the first measurement 170 inFIG. 6 is measurement x₁ (“x sub one”) in Equation 1 and is at theleading end of first leading set 152 as defined by direction of travel136. Second measurement 171 in FIG. 6 is measurement x₂ (“x sub two”) inEquation 1, third measurement 172 in FIG. 6 is measurement x₃ (“x subthree”) in Equation 1, fourth measurement 173 in FIG. 6 is measurementx₄ (“x sub five”) in Equation 1, fifth measurement 174 in FIG. 6 ismeasurement x₅ in Equation 1, sixth measurement 175 in FIG. 6 ismeasurement x₆ in Equation 1 and seventh measurement 176 in FIG. 6 ismeasurement x₇ in Equation 1. The analysis of these measurements 130using Equation 1 would start by calculating x₂−x₁, and summing withsubsequent deltas. Individual measurements 130 for second leading set182 can be similarly compared. Individual measurements 130 can also besimilarly compared for each of first trailing set 154 and secondtrailing set 184.

When analyzing trailing sets 154, 184, the summation progressionindicated in Equation 1 can be symmetrically applied to account for anegative slope as compared to leading sets 152, 182. To put this anotherway, when analyzing first trailing set 154, first measurement 130 inFIG. 1 , which is x₁ in Equation 1, is closest to the trailing edge oftop surface TS as defined by direction of travel 136. Continuing withthis example, second measurement 130 in FIG. 1 , which is x₂ in Equation1, is second-closest to the trailing edge of top surface TS as definedby direction of travel 136. Thus, it will be understood that analysis ofeach of first leading edge 152 and first trailing edge 154 progressesfrom the periphery of top surface TS towards the center. In this way,the sign of the resultant summation (e.g., is the result of thesummation positive or negative) for each of first leading set 152 andfirst trailing set 154 is consistent when closure C is properly affixedto container B.

Turning to FIGS. 7-9 , exemplary graphical representations of themeasurements 130 of each of first and second paths 150, 180 aredepicted. For these examples, FIG. 7 represents measurements 130 forclosure C that is properly affixed to container B. As will be seen inFIG. 7 , first and second paths 150, 180 are symmetrical with respect toeach other, they are symmetrical with respect to themselves, and all ofthe measurements are between a lower threshold (e.g., 0.5) and an upperthreshold (e.g., 0.65), each of these facts being indicative of closureC being properly affixed.

FIG. 8 represents a closure C that is not properly affixed, which can berecognized for several reasons. First, there is a lack of symmetry offirst path 150 with respect to itself (i.e., samples 1-16 aresubstantially higher than samples 24-40). Second, there is a lack ofsymmetry between first path 150 and second path 180 (i.e., samples 1-16in first path 150 are substantially higher than samples 1-16 of secondpath 180). Third, first path 150 includes measurements above upperthreshold (e.g., 0.65).

FIG. 9 also represents a closure C that is not properly affixed, whichcan again be recognized for several reasons. First, there is a lack ofsymmetry of second path 180 with respect to itself (i.e., samples 1-19are substantially higher than samples 21-40). Second, there is a lack ofsymmetry between first path 150 and second path 180 (i.e., samples 1-16in first path 150 are substantially higher than samples 1-16 of secondpath 180). Third, both first path 150 and second path 180 includemeasurements above upper threshold (e.g., 0.65).

In the exemplary analysis above in regard to FIGS. 7-9 , the Y-axismeasurements are indicative of a properly affixed closure C when theyare between measurements of 0.5 and 0.65. However, it will be understoodthat any thresholds may be used, and indeed the thresholds can bearbitrarily selected to correspond to the measurements being detected bysystem 100.

In one or more embodiments first and second lasers 106, 108 periodicallyperform measurements without knowing whether container B and closure Care beneath or approaching being beneath laser platform 110.Alternatively, system 100 may include a component to detect the presenceof container B beneath laser platform 110.

Turning now to FIG. 10 , system 100 further includes presence detector138. Presence detector 138 may be a laser, motion detector, or otherdevice that provides system 100 an indication regarding whethercontainer B with closure C is beneath or approaching being beneath laserplatform 110. When presence detector 138 indicates that container B isbeneath laser platform 110, or approaching being beneath laser platform110, then first and second lasers 106, 108 begin performing distancemeasurements 130.

Turning to FIG. 11 , illustrated therein is an exemplary method ofutilizing the concept(s) and system(s) in this disclosure. At step 501,system 100 detects whether closure C is beneath laser platform 110. Inone example, system 100 may detect the presence of closure C by virtueof measurements 130 being within a detection range (e.g., between alower threshold and an upper threshold to detect the presence of closureC). In another example, system 100 may include presence detector 138 todetect, or to aid system 110 in detecting, whether closure C is beneathlaser platform 110.

At step 502, system 100 collects measurements 130 of closure C.Measurements 130 include one or more measurements along first path 150and second path 180.

At step 503, system 100 analyzes measurements 130 to calculate a levelof confidence closure C is affixed properly. In one embodiment, system100 analyzes closure C using one of the above-described methodologies.In another embodiment, system 100 analyzes closure C using more than oneof the above-described methodologies.

In still another embodiment, system 100 may be configured to use a givensubset of methodologies in response to receiving information about theclosure C and/or the container B. For example, if closure C is made ofplastic and container B is made of a plastic, system 100 identifies afirst set of analysis methodologies to use, whereas if instead closure Cis made of metal and container B is made of glass, system 100 identifiesa second set of analysis methodologies to use.

At step 504, system 100 discards containers B for whom the chance oftheir closure C being properly affixed is lower than a threshold. In oneembodiment, system 100 discards any containers B for which system 100determines closure C may be not properly affixed (e.g., system 100discards containers B for which any data or analysis suggests closure Cis not properly affixed).

It should be understood that depending on one or more characteristics ofthe closure and container, the expected orientation of the closure maybe reversed if a characteristic is changed. For example, if a properlyaffixed closure is expected to be under negative pressure and thereforebe inwardly sloped, then the comparisons to the various thresholds willbe predicated on that closure orientation. However, if a properlyaffixed closure is expected to be under positive pressure and thereforebe outwardly sloped, then the comparisons to the various thresholds willbe the opposite compared to if the expectation was for an inward slope,in one or more of the embodiments described herein.

It should be understood that the figures illustrate the exemplaryembodiments in detail, and it should be understood that the presentapplication is not limited to the details or methodology set forth inthe description or illustrated in the figures. It should also beunderstood that the terminology is for the purpose of description onlyand should not be regarded as limiting.

Further modifications and alternative embodiments of various aspects ofthe disclosure will be apparent to those skilled in the art in view ofthis description. Accordingly, this description is to be construed asillustrative only. The construction and arrangements, shown in thevarious exemplary embodiments, are illustrative only. Although only afew embodiments have been described in detail in this disclosure, manymodifications are possible (e.g., variations in sizes, dimensions,structures, shapes and proportions of the various elements, values ofparameters, mounting arrangements, use of materials, colors,orientations, etc.) without materially departing from the novelteachings and advantages of the subject matter described herein. Someelements shown as integrally formed may be constructed of multiple partsor elements, the position of elements may be reversed or otherwisevaried, and the nature or number of discrete elements or positions maybe altered or varied. Other substitutions, modifications, changes andomissions may also be made in the design, operating conditions andarrangement of the various exemplary embodiments without departing fromthe scope of the present disclosure.

While the current application recites particular combinations offeatures in the claims appended hereto, various embodiments of thedisclosure relate to any combination of any of the features describedherein whether or not such combination is currently claimed, and anysuch combination of features may be claimed in this or futureapplications. Any of the features, elements, or components of any of theexemplary embodiments discussed above may be used alone or incombination with any of the features, elements, or components of any ofthe other embodiments discussed above.

In various exemplary embodiments, the relative dimensions, includingangles, lengths and radii, as shown in the Figures are to scale. Actualmeasurements of the Figures will disclose relative dimensions, anglesand proportions of the various exemplary embodiments. Various exemplaryembodiments extend to various ranges around the absolute and relativedimensions, angles and proportions that may be determined from theFigures. Various exemplary embodiments include any combination of one ormore relative dimensions or angles that may be determined from theFigures. Further, actual dimensions not expressly set out in thisdescription can be determined by using the ratios of dimensions measuredin the Figures in combination with the express dimensions set out inthis description.

What is claimed is:
 1. A closure monitoring system comprising: aconveyer that moves a container with a closure in a direction, theclosure having a top surface with a leading half towards the directionthe conveyer is moving and a trailing half away from the direction theconveyer is moving; a first device supported along a direction of theconveyer to generate a first plurality of distance signalsrepresentative of first distances to a top surface of the closure alonga first path that traverses the top surface of the closure, the firstplurality of distance signals including a first leading set and a firsttrailing set, the first leading set consisting of measurements from theleading half of the first path and the first trailing set consisting ofmeasurements from the trailing half of the first path; a second devicesupported along a direction of the conveyer to generate a secondplurality of distance signals representative of second distances to thetop surface of the closure along a second path that traverses the topsurface of the closure, the second plurality of distance signalsincluding a second leading set and a second trailing set, the secondleading set consisting of measurements from the leading half of thesecond path and the second trailing set consisting of measurements fromthe trailing half of the second path; and a processor coupled to thefirst and second devices and configured to analyze the first pluralityof distance signals and the second plurality of distance signals,calculate an average, and generate a signal based on the analysisindicating whether the closure is properly affixed to the container. 2.The closure monitoring system of claim 1, wherein the processor isconfigured to: calculate an average for at least two of the firstleading set, the second leading set, the first trailing set, and thesecond trailing set; determine the closure is properly affixed as aresult of each of the calculated averages being less than a firstthreshold; and determine the closure is not properly affixed as a resultof at least one of the calculated averages being above the firstthreshold.
 3. The closure monitoring system of claim 2, wherein the atleast two of the first leading set, the first trailing set, the secondleading set, and the second trailing set each comprise between 10% and35% of the path from which they were selected.
 4. The closure monitoringsystem of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to:calculate an average for at least two of the first leading set, thesecond leading set, the first trailing set, and the second trailing set;identify a highest average and a lowest average of the calculatedaverages; calculate a difference between the highest average and thelowest average; determine the closure is properly affixed as a result ofthe difference being less than a second threshold; and determine theclosure is not properly affixed as a result of the difference beingabove the second threshold.
 5. The closure monitoring system of claim 4,wherein the at least two of the first leading set, the first trailingset, the second leading set, and the second trailing set each comprisebetween 10% and 35% of the path from which they were selected.
 6. Theclosure monitoring system of claim 1, wherein the processor isconfigured to: determine a slope for at least two of the first leadingset, the second leading set, the first trailing set, and the secondtrailing set; and determine whether the closure is properly affixed atleast in part based on the determining the slope for at least two of thefirst leading set, the second leading set, the first trailing set, andthe second trailing set.
 7. The closure monitoring system of claim 6,wherein the at least two of the first leading set, the first trailingset, the second leading set, and the second trailing set each comprisebetween 10% and 35% of the path from which they were selected.
 8. Theclosure monitoring system of claim 1, wherein the processor isconfigured to: determine a slope for each of the first leading set, thesecond leading set, the first trailing set, and the second trailing set;and determine whether the closure is properly affixed at least in partas a result of at least one of the following statements being true: theslope of the first leading set being symmetrical to the slope of thefirst trailing set; and the slope of the second leading set beingsymmetrical to the slope of the second trailing set.
 9. The closuremonitoring system of claim 8, wherein each of the first leading set, thefirst trailing set, the second leading set, and the second trailing setcomprise between 10% and 35% of the path from which they were selected.10. The closure monitoring system of claim 8, wherein the processor isconfigured to determine whether the closure is properly affixed at leastin part as a result of both of the following statements being true: theslope of the first leading set being symmetrical to the slope of thefirst trailing set; and the slope of the second leading set beingsymmetrical to the slope of the second trailing set.
 11. The closuremonitoring system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to:identify a first middle set from the first plurality of distancesignals, the first middle set collectively being centered on the firstpath; calculate a first leading average of the first leading set;calculate a first middle average of the first middle set; calculate afirst trailing average of the first trailing set; calculate a firstdifference between the first middle average and the first leadingaverage; calculate a second difference between the first middle averageand the first trailing average; and determine whether the closure isproperly affixed at least in part based on analyzing the firstdifference and the second difference.
 12. The closure monitoring systemof claim 11, wherein the processor is configured to: identify a secondmiddle set from the second plurality of distance signals, the secondmiddle set collectively being centered on the second path; calculate asecond leading average of the second leading set; calculate a secondmiddle average of the second middle set; calculate a second trailingaverage of the second trailing set; calculate a third difference betweenthe second middle average and the second leading average; calculate afourth difference between the second middle average and the secondtrailing average; and determine whether the closure is properly affixedat least in part based on analyzing the third difference and the fourthdifference.
 13. A closure monitoring system comprising: a conveyer thatmoves a container with a closure in a direction, the closure having aleading surface generally facing the direction the conveyer is moving,and an opposing trailing surface; a first device supported along adirection of the conveyer to generate a first plurality of distancesignals representative of first distances to a top surface of theclosure along a first path that traverses the top surface of theclosure; a second device supported along a direction of the conveyer togenerate a second plurality of distance signals representative of seconddistances to the top surface of the closure along a second path thattraverses the top surface of the closure; and a processor coupled to thefirst and second devices configured to: identify a first pair from thefirst plurality of distance signals, the first and second elements ofthe first pair being corresponding distances from the leading andtrailing surfaces, respectively; identify a second pair from the secondplurality of distance signals, the first and second elements of thesecond pair being corresponding distances from the leading and trailingsurfaces, respectively; calculate a first difference between theelements of the first pair; calculate a second difference between theelements of the second pair; determine whether the closure is properlyaffixed as a result analyzing the first difference and the seconddifference.
 14. The closure monitoring system of claim 13, wherein thefirst and second elements of the first pair are the second-closestmeasurements to the leading and trailing surfaces, respectively.
 15. Theclosure monitoring system of claim 14, wherein the first and secondelements of the second pair are the second-closest measurements to theleading and trailing surfaces, respectively.
 16. The closure monitoringsystem of claim 13, wherein the processor is configured to: calculate asum of the first difference and the second difference; and determinewhether the closure is properly affixed as a result analyzing the sum.17. The closure monitoring system of claim 13, wherein the processor isconfigured to: identify a first plurality of pairs from the firstplurality of distance signals, the first plurality of pairs includingthe first pair, the first and second elements of each pair beingcorresponding distances from the leading and trailing surfaces,respectively; identify a second plurality of pairs from the secondplurality of distance signals, the second plurality of pairs includingthe second pair, the first and second elements of each pair beingcorresponding distances from the leading and trailing surfaces,respectively; calculate first differences between the elements for eachof the first plurality of pairs; calculate second differences betweenthe elements for each of the second plurality of pairs; calculate a sumof the first differences and the second differences; determine theclosure is properly affixed when the sum is less than a first threshold;and determine the closure is not properly affixed when the sum is abovethe first threshold.
 18. The closure monitoring system of claim 17,wherein there are at least 10 pairs in each of the first plurality ofpairs and the second plurality of pairs.
 19. The closure monitoringsystem of claim 17, wherein none of the elements of the first pluralityof pairs are the closest measurements to a periphery of the top surfaceof the closure compared to other distance measurements within the firstpath.
 20. The closure monitoring system of claim 19, wherein none of theelements of the second plurality of pairs are the closest measurementsto a periphery of the top surface of the closure compared to otherdistance measurements within the second path.